Category: TV trends

Is continuity expert a TV job now?

Ever watched a show so many times you noticed errors?

For me, “Gilmore Girls” has many errors. The church bells work, break, then work again. Rory is a mustard person, then a ketchup person. Emily skinny-dipped, then Richard says she kept her clothes on. I could go on, but admittedly I’ve seen this show way too many times.

It’s the struggle with binge-watching; when you watch multiple episodes in a row (or a season in a week), it’s much easier to catch flaws in the writing.

Even recently when I watched “Full House,” I noticed Danny doesn’t have his compulsive neatness until the later seasons.

Before Netflix, we only had reruns. And you may not even catch them sequentially. If you missed a day, you missed the episodes. That was it…at least until the next time through.

Now with the Internet, people dissect shows to oblivion. You can watch episodes over and over whenever. We’re not stuck to the TV Guide or channel listings.

So when a show comes out, it has to be flawless. A show can’t afford to have mistakes that commenters will eviscerate the moment it airs.

When “The Good Place” aired, and then expanded its universe, the amount of continuity and work it must have taken was astounding.

I’d imagine writer’s rooms must have a crime-scene-red-string set of boards mapping out storylines, characteristics…anything to help keep continuity at bay.

In order to satisfy today’s viewers, shows have to nail:

Character traits, histories
Conflicts prior to airing, in the same timeline
When and where stories take place, in order
Dealbreakers for characters

And that’s the bare minimum.

So, yes, we still need writers. AI can’t solve this.

Writer’s strike means one long summer of bad TV

We’re in for a long rest of 2023 the way things are going.

Members of the WGA are on strike. From news reports, it’ll be a while before we get new scripted material, and actors may join.

Rumors of a strike circulated for a bit before it formally started May 2. And it feels like some networks were assuming it was inevitable.

Let’s take a look at what some networks are doing during this strike.

CBS

All new shows or seasons say “Coming Soon” at the end of the previews.

This includes “Young Sheldon” and “Ghosts,” which ended on a cliffhanger. There also looks to be a new “Matlock” starring Kathy Bates, and at least something has been written and filmed based on clips from the commercial.

Fox

Two reality shows flooded commercials on this broadcast network.

There’s “Food Stars,” another Gordon Ramsey competition show. Plus William Shatner will host “Stars on Mars” starting June 5.

No, they didn’t film on Mars, and the cast is an interesting hodge-podge (Ariel Winter from “Modern Family” and Tom Schwartz from “Vanderpump Rules”… and your social media feeds … are among the cast).

ABC

As if watching so many more game and reality shows this summer and potentially fall wasn’t enough, ABC has “The Game Show Show,” a docuseries about…you guessed it, game shows.

It’s actually interesting, but it’s only four parts.

There’s also “The Prank Panel,” which includes Johnny Knoxville. It looks like Punk’d for regular people.

And, ABC has finally got the ball rolling for its long-discussed senior bachelor show, though it’s called “The Golden Bachelor.” It seems to me the writers already left before a name was settled on. It’ll air in the fall, after this summer’s “The Bachelorette.”

the CW

the CW doesn’t really have a game show pull, nor does it do reality shows.

Now, they’ve done this before, but they announced (before the strike officially started) they are bringing a Canadian show, “Sullivan’s Crossing,” to the network.

I’m guessing it was an easy decision. The show has ties to “Virgin River,” and it stars Chad Michael Murray and Scott Patterson. The CW knows its demographic.

This is just what I’ve noticed; it’s not a comprehensive list. But overall, none of this particularly excites me, but this is what happens when there’s a strike.

Networks, if you want good TV again…pay your writers. And don’t use A.I.; it’s unnatural.

I’d suggest catching up with other shows, like “Not Dead Yet.”

A Streaming TV Casualty: Theme Songs

I binged the new musical show “Up Here” on Hulu last weekend, and I was surprised to hear a theme song with opening credits.

If I had to guess, they wanted to highlight the talent behind the Hulu show (it boasts the writers from “Frozen” and the director of “Hamilton”), but it threw me off. It didn’t help that the song is actually the big finale song, so it always felt out of place as the opening every episode.

But also because I thought we’d said RIP to the long theme song.

“Cheers,” “Friends,” “Full House”…all iconic theme songs, and all more than a minute long.

Nowadays, with streaming, lots of new shows, and the Skip Intro button, most TV shows don’t bother with an opening credits sequence.

We don’t need an intro to the cast that changes from year to year, season to season (Sidenote: It really bugs me that when you watch “Friends” on TBS, they only show the credits from season 7, regardless of what season is actually airing.).

With binge-watching, we’re not that dumb. We know the characters and don’t need a reminder of each one and their real name every 22-45 minutes.

The first time I remember being shocked by the lack of a theme song was “Glee.” Each show had a one-word note,”Glee,” with a black screen only. It was so simple, it was almost stark.

I miss the silly bops we got from theme songs, like “Scrubs” or “The Big Bang Theory.” What show can boast their theme song is by the Barenaked Ladies? Sure, they’re more retro now, but that’s pretty cool.

Or what about the heartfelt “Where You Lead” from “Gilmore Girls”? That’s an intro I don’t skip very often; I like the song so much.

Ultimately, longer theme songs mean less time to tell your story, especially on broadcast TV. On streaming, time isn’t as bound to a schedule, so you can play around, but let’s face it, people are probably hitting the Skip Intro button.

We want the story. We don’t want the theme song. We want to get into the episode without interruption.

RIP the theme song…another byproduct of streaming.

Can we reinvent IP successfully?

Last night, I watched “Beauty and the Beast: A 30th Celebration.”

I was more of a Cinderella than Belle kid, but I have some special memories associated with various iterations of the 1991 Disney film.

“Beauty and the Beast” was the first Disney animated feature nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars, and it won two (song and score). The Broadway musical ran for 13 years; the live-action 2017 remake was nominated for two Oscars. It’s a big deal.

So it made sense to celebrate the anniversary of the Disney classic with a movie on ABC (it’s now streaming on Disney+). And Disney brought the star power, with H.E.R. starring as Belle, Shania Twain as Mrs. Potts, Martin Short as Lumiere, David Alan Grier as Cogsworth and Josh Groban as Beast. Not to mention Jon M. Chu (“Crazy Rich Asians,” the upcoming “Wicked” movies) was a producer on the hybrid animated and live-action special.

But did it work? Yes and no.

Rita Moreno introduced segments and revealed behind-the-scenes tidbits. The back and forth between animated and live was mostly seamless. The costumes were beautiful and just enough over the top to be fun but not crazy.

On the flip side, it had a lot of live-theater work that just doesn’t translate on a TV screen. H.E.R. and Twain do not have the vocal range to pull off the more significant songs, though they did their best.

My biggest complaint was it tried too hard. There were some segments that were avant-garde, which doesn’t work in an anniversary celebration of a classic.

All this to say, is it worth trying to reimagine IP?

It feels like everything entertainment is a franchise or re-imagination. Original ideas fall by the wayside.

Yet people crave original ideas. Look at the success of “Everything Everywhere All at Once.” We want something new and exciting, where we can’t know what will happen.

Franchises, sequels, etc., make money, no question. They have a built-in audience. It doesn’t matter if people don’t like it, so many others will flock to screens to stay in the loop. There’s a reason why the MCU has multiple phases in the works. (I’m not an MCU person, and with all the movies and TV shows, there’s zero chance I will catch up.)

So what are execs to do? Follow money or creativity? Of course, they’ll follow the money!

I give the producers credit for the 30th anniversary special. They tried to keep the classic feel while providing new views. It just didn’t always work, and ultimately it went too far to truly bring in the nostalgia it was aiming for.

As viewers, we must try to promote and view original content often. Because I’m not sure I want to watch a 50th-anniversary celebration of “Beauty and the Beast,” even though I’m sure execs will do something for it.

The truth about dating reality shows

We all know reality shows aren’t really reality. They’re a contrived environment meant for entertainment.

So what happens when dating shows become a joke? TV networks create even more gimmicks.

Monday is the start of season 19 of The Bachelorette, or The Bachelorettes. Two women will be handing out roses the entire season. Bachelor Nation has done this twice before, but never for an entire season.

The two women, Gabby Windey and Rachel Recchia, were dumped by last season’s bachelor at the same time (please cue a massive eye roll for how dumb that was). So far, it seems they’ll make it through the journey without drama between them, but will it be dramatic in other ways?

Bachelor producers certainly want us to think so. This gimmick seems like a huge ploy to attempt to get ratings back up after recent declines.

While Bachelor Nation has been going strong for 20 years, its success rate isn’t good. One Bachelor is married to his winner (though two are married to their runners-up after both pulling switcheroos during the finale), and the most recent two are still in a relationship with the woman they chose.

The Bachelorettes have a slightly higher success rate, with four still married to their pick (another final couple announced their divorce in 2020 after eight years together).

The spinoff Bachelor in Paradise could be deemed the most successful in terms of couples staying together, but there’s not a clear-cut formula to mark success for that show.

The Bachelor and Bachelorette have all but monopolized the dating reality show realm. Its tradition of handing out roses, 1-on-1 and group dates, the limo entrances, the fantasy suites, and travel make it seem like such a fairytale.

And maybe early on it was. Who wouldn’t mind a little humiliation for travel opportunities, a swag bag and the chance to fall in love? (Contestants don’t get paid monetarily, but the lead does.)

But in the age of Tinder and other online dating sites, why bother taking unpaid time off work for a person you don’t know and probably doesn’t live in your state when you can just go online and find hundreds of available options?

In a word: influence.

It’s not just 15 minutes of fame anyone; contestants can buoy a 3- or 4-episode run (or a particularly interesting night-one or villain turn) into an Instagram influence deal and verified account.

Tayshia Adams, one of the more recent Bachelorettes, is an influencer and co-host. She was a phlebotomist. She’s not alone in leaving her profession for “lifestyle expert” work.

The romance doesn’t matter on this show anymore; it’s how you can score celebrity status.

Producers know it too. The dates are almost verbatim every season, and manipulation of contestants is fairly obvious. But people seem more than willing to sign up for humiliation at the chance of mediocre fame (ironically, at least one person each season is called out for not being there for the right reasons, aka finding love).

Reality TV isn’t great, let’s be real. It’s mindless entertainment that allows you to turn your brain off and laugh at other people. It’s watercooler TV, even in the age of remote work.

With as many options as there are these days, you can listen to or watch recaps, which typically boil down a 2-hour, with commercials episode into around 20 minutes, instead of watching the actual episode. You lose some of the drama, but you also save time while still staying in the know.

Because we all see the fame opportunities and Bachelor shows still have social and pop culture traction, other TV networks keep trying to find their own version.

This winter, Fox brought back Joe Millionaire with the subtitle “For Richer or Poorer,” but the bits I saw looked so early 2000s, it was almost gross. And neither couple lasted long past airing.

NBC brought “The Courtship,” which felt like Bridgerton meets Bachelor. The winning couple isn’t together anymore either.

The process doesn’t work. That’s obvious. But people love to watch other people crash and burn. And the fantasy of falling in love still rings so true for people, it’s hard to resist. We hope they work out, but deep down we know it’s unlikely.

I just wish the gimmicks would stop, but that’s what goes viral.

I could stop watching (I prefer the recaps more and more), but it’s hard not to watch to see what wacky date or trick they’ll try next.

Hulu’s three true-life stories examined

Truth can set you free…if you can handle it.

Hulu has dropped three miniseries, eight episodes each, based on true events.

Is this OK? Is this good TV? Is this informative in a harmful way? Let’s take a look.

Pam & Tommy

Casting/styling for realistic looks: Amazing

When first-look pictures came out, I was shocked at how Sebastian Stan and Lily James looked.

Accuracy: Iffy

Look, this is about a celebrity couple and their sex tape. It seems like some parts are accurate, like their whirlwind beach wedding, but some things happened but not in the order portrayed.

The show is based on an article (and bits of Tommy Lee’s biography), but this is the type of show where we’ll never know the whole truth, especially without the consent of Pam or Tommy.

Pamela has spoken out on her approval of the show, Lily James seems to have gotten her voice right.

Rating: C

This is a super-stylized show (#iykyk), and it’s not for everyone. The saga of Pam & Tommy is a lot about sex, but they still should have some privacy for their own items.

This was a private tape, and it feels wrong to capitalize on it, even if it’s for cultural context.

The Dropout

Casting/styling for realistic looks: Only the styling

Amanda Seyfried has a unique look, so it’s hard not to see her as herself, and she only has a slight resemblance to Elizabeth Holmes.

But they’ve got the look of her down. The red lips, the messy hair, the black outfits? Check.

Accuracy: Good

This is based on the podcast of the same name, so it has more research behind it. Plus, the story has been in the news for a while.

The imagery of Seyfried as Holmes for her 2017 testimony looks accurate.

The facts are there, from what we know. You’ll never know private conversations, just like we’re still unsure how real the deep voice of Holmes is.

Rating: B-

To help interpret the different years, music is used. But it’s so incredibly distracting, especially in the first two episodes, which cover roughly 2001 to 2007. We get it, the music was different then; it’s fine.

In my opinion, Holmes is a narcissist, and I have more questions about her than answers, even after watching a few episodes.

It’s an interesting story of ambition, technology and capitalism, but it could be harmful for the trust in healthcare.

The Girl from Plainville

Casting/styling for realistic looks: Great for the lead, OK for everyone else

Elle Fanning looks like Michelle Carter for the most part, especially in the later years.

But the supporting characters don’t look like their real-life counterparts at all.

Accuracy: Mixed

There’s fact and fiction in this miniseries based on an Esquire article.

She liked “Glee,” and talked about it often. But the couple didn’t see each other that much before he died.

The key, though, is the text messages are real. They’re part of court record, so they’re detailed exactly as they were typed.

Rating: B+

As much as I found Elle Fanning’s portrayal gritting (probably because she’s playing a vapid 15-year-old at the start), it’s such an intriguing story.

I zipped through the first few episodes and haven’t stopped thinking about it.

It’s a little scary to focus on something dubbed the “texting suicide case,” but I think we see something beyond glamorizing suicide by instead focusing on grief and social media’s influence on society.

All of the episodes for all three series are on Hulu. It’s a lot of true-life stories, but remember TV isn’t real.

2020 award nominations prove broadcast TV is dead. Here’s why.

One. That’s it.

Between the Golden Globes and SAG Awards, only one broadcast show, “This Is Us,” received a nomination.

Giving the streaming platform growth, this isn’t surprising. Broadcast nominations have been waning for years, but 2020 is proving to be a new low.

Is it worth broadcast shows even trying anymore? They’re fighting an uphill battle against cable and streaming.

Here are issues broadcast networks deal with:

Limits

Comedies have to be 22 min. Dramas are 44 min. Two-hour reality shows have 30 minutes of ads. And there’s no wiggle room. Remember when “Friends” had extended episodes? Not a thing anymore.

Watch any Netflix half-hour series and the times, and you’ll notice all sorts of fluctuation. One episode will run for 34 minutes, 23 minutes, 38 minutes, 26 minutes. The time is based on the story, not the ads.

There’s also the language limit. You can’t swear (unless you work with “The Good Place” forking model). Broadcast networks have to work with certain standards (thanks, FCC), when cable and streaming do not.

Revenue

Ads still run king in media, but subscriptions are providing more and more revenue.

Netflix has hiked its prices steadily over the last few years, and it doesn’t even have ads. Hulu has an ad-free service. I’m waiting for Disney+ to add more/any ads. Apple TV+ doesn’t have ads, but it also doesn’t have that much content yet.

Advertisers follow the money. One screw up and you’re done. In an age when one Tweet can cause an upheaval, for better or worse, it can be a domino effect.

Networks have to rely on ad dollars, which is why when the Roseanne debacle happened it was handled within hours, before more reputation damage could be done.

Creativity

Ryan Murphy and Shonda Rhimes, two network juggernauts, signed Netflix deals in the last year.

Why? Creativity. They can expand their work without any constraints. It’s no-holds-bar in the best kind of way.

Now, do I think Murphy’s “The Politician” is a great piece of TV? No. (In fact, I found all the characters irritating and plot way too overdone.) But, it’s different, and no one can deny that.

After 10+ years of dominating ABC and being the center of TGIT, Rhimes can leave the set plots behind and explore, even past the confines of “Scandal.”

Can you blame them?

Upfronts 2018: Trends for broadcast TV

Making changes but rebooting favorites…that about sums up “new” TV in 2018.

Here are 3 trends from last week’s upfronts.

Reboots galore

The reboots trend will never die at this rate.

Coming off the success of ABC‘s reboot of “Roseanne,” more are coming.

First, “Murphy Brown” returns on CBS, with Candice Bergen bringing her strong newswoman character back to the screen. It’ll air on Thursdays, after CBS hits “The Big Bang Theory” and “Mom.”

Then, there’s “Charmed,” which the CW is bringing back to life. It’ll air alongside “Supergirl” on Sundays, a night that the network hasn’t aired new shows on before.

Lastly, “Last Man Standing” is coming back, on Fox. It’ll be paired with another comedy tailored for an older audience, “The Cool Kids.”

Switcheroos

Speaking of changing networks, “Brooklyn Nine-Nine” is going to NBC after being canceled by Fox.

“Lethal Weapon” replaced lead actor Clayne Crawford after he was accused of poor onset behavior.

And with Thursday Night Football shifting from CBS to Fox, there are many schedule shifts for that network, which, for a network that is known for comedy, only has two new comedies premiering in the fall (“Rel” and the aforementioned “The Cool Kids”)

Very few new shows

With so many networks vying for viewers’ attention, it seems networks are playing it safe by airing fewer new shows and saving some for midseason, when a series premier typically means half the number of episodes.

This fall, most broadcast networks are airing only 2-4 new shows, with the exception of CBS, which boasts six new fall shows.

Midseason, which used to have fewer premieres, now seems to have a similar number of new shows (though that could change before January).

However, the reboots start in the fall, no doubt because they’ll get the viewer’s interest more easily thanks to old and new fans watching.

How TV comedies handle death

Resting in peace isn’t the easiest topic to cover.

While TV dramas seem to handle death on a regular basis, TV comedies handle it without consistency.

But how should a show that mostly about making people laugh handle one of the saddest life events?

Two popular sitcoms, “Friends” and “How I Met Your Mother,” went from one end of the spectrum to the other.

Two of the deaths on “Friends” were played for laughs. In TOW Nana Dies Twice, Ross and Monica’s grandmother is thought to be dead, but she has one last breath at the hospital, freaking out the siblings. At the burial, Ross falls into a gravesite. Yikes.

When Phoebe’s grandmother dies, 3-D glasses are passed out at the funeral. And later, her ashes are still in her taxi cab when Joey drives to Vegas. What?

The laughs went a little too far into an unrealistic, overly silly concept in both episodes.

On the other side, there’s “How I Met Your Mother,” which I think has one of the saddest deaths on a TV comedy.

When Marshall’s dad dies, it’s revealed at the end of the episode. Just when Marshall finds out they don’t have anything to worry about with infertility, Lily breaks the news about his father.

On IMDb, it’s said that actor Jason Segel didn’t know that’s what Alyson Hannigan would say, so his shocked reaction is real. And it’s so raw.

In the following episode, Last Words, Marshall urges his friends to remember the last words they said to their fathers. It really makes you think while showing a major life event and how it can affect friends.

While sitcoms are typically at a heightened reality, on-screen deaths and funerals can benefit from showing multiple emotions. In real life, death can bring laughter and tears.

On “Scrubs,” death is built into the hospital setting. Sometimes it was sad to watch beloved patients pass, and the writers did a great job with J.D.’s narrations commenting on how short life is and how everyone passes. On the hand, sometimes they made a point to make you at least chuckle. There is fantasy sequence where Turk and Carla raise a pumpkin and fret when he/she/it breaks.

It’s a nice balance on a show that’s filled with laughs and medical jargon.

“Modern Family” also had its script legs in both sides.

In Goodnight Gracie, the whole crew goes to Florida when Phil’s mother passed. Alex is confused and upset when her grandma, whom she bonded with deeply, leaves only a lighter for her, but by the episode’s conclusion, she discovers that the lighter had a memory and a hidden meaning from her grandmother.

Phil and Claire, on the other hand, awkwardly try (they first claim to be traveling vacuum salespeople) to meet a woman whom Phil’s mom thinks would make a great new partner for her surviving husband.

In season 3, the Dunphys’ neighbor passes, and all Luke wants is his TV. At first, Claire doesn’t think he’s accepted the death (even though she herself couldn’t stop smiling when telling people the neighbor had died), but it turns out it was a memory for him, and Claire calms down.

While these moments may be less memorable, they feel more in tune with the emotions we feel when someone dies.

But hey, that’s not really what sitcoms are for, are they?

Award shows 2018: Do network shows have a place anymore?

At the Golden Globes this year, only one out of 11 TV award winners was a network TV show representative (Sterling K. Brown won best actor in a drama series for NBC’s “This is Us.”)

Tomorrow’s SAG Awards only have five network TV show nominations among all the categories.

Do network shows even stand a chance anymore?

Now that Netflix consistently pulls out award-winning shows, with Amazon and Hulu reaching their stride in quality shows, is it time to separate out network shows from paid services shows?

The way people watch Netflix shows vs. a show on ABC, Fox, etc. is so different. You can binge a Netflix series in a weekend, while NBC draws out one season of “This is Us” from September to April or so (but maybe that’s so we can all take a sobbing break).

Plus, Hulu and those networks have advantages network shows don’t. On a network like CBS, you can’t swear, show nudity, depict graphic violence and other things. Rules must be followed. On online networks, the rules don’t apply. Anything can happen. And it usually does.

Another big difference is network shows play to commercial breaks. They place cliffhangers and plot points in just the right spot to keep you watching. On Netflix, it seems like most original drama episodes end on cliffhangers so you’ll continue watching. And Netflix doesn’t even ask the pesky question “Are you still watching?” when it’s an original show. It can play out like one long, continuous story, and viewers soak it right up.

Network shows just can’t play the same game online networks can. So is it fair to pit them against each other in award categories?

Plenty of quality shows still exist on ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and the CW. Should they be recognized in a different way? Or does that just further depict the difference in the TV formats?

It may be time to revisit how award shows handle TV shows.